Never mind generative art... generative movies are where it's at.

NeuM

@knewspeak said:

@SevenSystems said:

@knewspeak said:

@SevenSystems said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@NeuM said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:

@Luxthor said:
This dog is going through window shutters, every video example is full of nonsense.

Yeah it’s definitely impressive but all very much in dream space still. I guess it’ll get better and better but I wonder if it’ll ever be utterly convincing considering the fact that it’s less ‘intelligence’ and much more ‘machine learning’ - it’s only ever going to be comparing it’s results to its dataset and fingers crossed it’s what’s expected of it…great for Lynch type things (where you’re happy with unintentional surreality, but for stuff that needs the nuance that we as incredibly media literate modern humans like to consume, not yet, and maybe not ever)

Machines will never be able to make art, just because art is about life before everything else.

Sorry for my bluntness, but it’s like the difference between real sex and watching pornography. 🫣

But movies and art aren't real life either. And good movies and good art can be analyzed, copied, improved and repackaged.

Absolutely. I've played with image generators a lot in the past months and I'm convinced that they can already create images that are considered good artwork by many. And isn't that one of the more important aspects of art?

Not about life?! Tell me then what name Tokyo represents to you. Or, when you need to make a meaningful prompt, you still need to use the name of the artist. Did you ask yourself why?

That's why I said "one aspect", not art as the whole idea.

Anyhow, “art is in the eye of the beholder”, as they used to say. I won't, and I can’t alter your personal preference as to what is or isn’t art.

Of course.
I'd like to invite you to do the same: Spend your time with different recent image generators, try many different prompts and watch what the different engines have to offer.

For centuries, artists learned from other artists but developed their own style and unique opus. They move the art forward, not backwards. Mediums and formats are only techniques, sort of disciplines, we humans accept that as global convention. Simply to send the message, our emotions, and stories of life.

AI is no different. It learns from different artists, somehow finds a few typical features for that artist and creates new variations of it. It will even learn how one artist has interpreted the work of other artists in his own sense. I don't think think that there can be a clear distinction looking at the end result. The difference is only in the process, and don't get me wrong, I love it when humans create art, no doubt about that!

Maybe generic Frankenstein-like collages of hunderds metamorphed styles became popular for some time, but it isn’t art and never will be. 😇

It's not as simple as that. Try it for yourself.

It looks like you are reasoning and generalizing on the wrong terms. Mimicry will always be mimicry. Artificial leather jackets will always be just plastic that wants to be leather.

You are an intelligent person, just look at the difference between a theoretically artificial neuron and a real human one. ;)

Human neuron:

Artificial neuron:

Just because human neurons are an extremely inefficient (and thus complex) implementation of one doesn't mean that they're better 😉

Building a bigger, faster machine doesn’t mean you’ll create a conscious organic replication of a human being, you’ll just get a bigger, faster machine. We are unique by nature, beyond mere duplication.

As nobody knows what consciousness is or how it arises, it's also impossible to say if we will be able to replicate it, or indeed might already have.

Or if we are being fooled is the other possibility.

That is also a possibility. Human consciousness may just be another evolved survival mechanism as a way for us to deal with abstractions (which are, of course, all imaginary) for advantage.

setAI

@SevenSystems said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@NeuM said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:

@Luxthor said:
This dog is going through window shutters, every video example is full of nonsense.

Yeah it’s definitely impressive but all very much in dream space still. I guess it’ll get better and better but I wonder if it’ll ever be utterly convincing considering the fact that it’s less ‘intelligence’ and much more ‘machine learning’ - it’s only ever going to be comparing it’s results to its dataset and fingers crossed it’s what’s expected of it…great for Lynch type things (where you’re happy with unintentional surreality, but for stuff that needs the nuance that we as incredibly media literate modern humans like to consume, not yet, and maybe not ever)

Machines will never be able to make art, just because art is about life before everything else.

Sorry for my bluntness, but it’s like the difference between real sex and watching pornography. 🫣

But movies and art aren't real life either. And good movies and good art can be analyzed, copied, improved and repackaged.

Absolutely. I've played with image generators a lot in the past months and I'm convinced that they can already create images that are considered good artwork by many. And isn't that one of the more important aspects of art?

Not about life?! Tell me then what name Tokyo represents to you. Or, when you need to make a meaningful prompt, you still need to use the name of the artist. Did you ask yourself why?

That's why I said "one aspect", not art as the whole idea.

Anyhow, “art is in the eye of the beholder”, as they used to say. I won't, and I can’t alter your personal preference as to what is or isn’t art.

Of course.
I'd like to invite you to do the same: Spend your time with different recent image generators, try many different prompts and watch what the different engines have to offer.

For centuries, artists learned from other artists but developed their own style and unique opus. They move the art forward, not backwards. Mediums and formats are only techniques, sort of disciplines, we humans accept that as global convention. Simply to send the message, our emotions, and stories of life.

AI is no different. It learns from different artists, somehow finds a few typical features for that artist and creates new variations of it. It will even learn how one artist has interpreted the work of other artists in his own sense. I don't think think that there can be a clear distinction looking at the end result. The difference is only in the process, and don't get me wrong, I love it when humans create art, no doubt about that!

Maybe generic Frankenstein-like collages of hunderds metamorphed styles became popular for some time, but it isn’t art and never will be. 😇

It's not as simple as that. Try it for yourself.

It looks like you are reasoning and generalizing on the wrong terms. Mimicry will always be mimicry. Artificial leather jackets will always be just plastic that wants to be leather.

You are an intelligent person, just look at the difference between a theoretically artificial neuron and a real human one. ;)

Human neuron:

Artificial neuron:

Just because human neurons are an extremely inefficient (and thus complex) implementation of one doesn't mean that they're better 😉

There's no argument here simply because there are plenty of biocomputing projects using neuromorphic approaches, including directly bioengineering neurons into information processing devices.

The claim that computers cannot do x because they are not alive is a very temporary situation.

Simon

@drez said:
So…exactly like sampling? 😂

Don't you get paid if someone samples your song?

Not so with Ai.

drez

@Simon said:

@drez said:
So…exactly like sampling? 😂

Don't you get paid if someone samples your song?

Not so with Ai.

It wasn’t always that way. Laws had to change. They will change with AI.

AudioGus

@drez said:

@Simon said:

@drez said:
So…exactly like sampling? 😂

Don't you get paid if someone samples your song?

Not so with Ai.

It wasn’t always that way. Laws had to change. They will change with AI.

It is tricky right now. Tech companies with lawyers and lobbyists did not invest billions of dollars in music samplers back in the day.
Plus there is this new AI-race between countries. There is a lot of talk of "if we don't they will"... It is not a good time.

Also even if they did slap laws at this stuff the open source models are already out there, that can be finetuned and made to work in daisy chains feeding each other, with massive (yet to be tapped) potential for disrupting culture systems and inherently slip through existing laws due to their fingerprint free nature. It is a cliche but the genie really is out of the bottle.

knewspeak

@NeuM said:

@knewspeak said:

@SevenSystems said:

@knewspeak said:

@SevenSystems said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@Luxthor said:

@rs2000 said:

@NeuM said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:

@Luxthor said:
This dog is going through window shutters, every video example is full of nonsense.

Yeah it’s definitely impressive but all very much in dream space still. I guess it’ll get better and better but I wonder if it’ll ever be utterly convincing considering the fact that it’s less ‘intelligence’ and much more ‘machine learning’ - it’s only ever going to be comparing it’s results to its dataset and fingers crossed it’s what’s expected of it…great for Lynch type things (where you’re happy with unintentional surreality, but for stuff that needs the nuance that we as incredibly media literate modern humans like to consume, not yet, and maybe not ever)

Machines will never be able to make art, just because art is about life before everything else.

Sorry for my bluntness, but it’s like the difference between real sex and watching pornography. 🫣

But movies and art aren't real life either. And good movies and good art can be analyzed, copied, improved and repackaged.

Absolutely. I've played with image generators a lot in the past months and I'm convinced that they can already create images that are considered good artwork by many. And isn't that one of the more important aspects of art?

Not about life?! Tell me then what name Tokyo represents to you. Or, when you need to make a meaningful prompt, you still need to use the name of the artist. Did you ask yourself why?

That's why I said "one aspect", not art as the whole idea.

Anyhow, “art is in the eye of the beholder”, as they used to say. I won't, and I can’t alter your personal preference as to what is or isn’t art.

Of course.
I'd like to invite you to do the same: Spend your time with different recent image generators, try many different prompts and watch what the different engines have to offer.

For centuries, artists learned from other artists but developed their own style and unique opus. They move the art forward, not backwards. Mediums and formats are only techniques, sort of disciplines, we humans accept that as global convention. Simply to send the message, our emotions, and stories of life.

AI is no different. It learns from different artists, somehow finds a few typical features for that artist and creates new variations of it. It will even learn how one artist has interpreted the work of other artists in his own sense. I don't think think that there can be a clear distinction looking at the end result. The difference is only in the process, and don't get me wrong, I love it when humans create art, no doubt about that!

Maybe generic Frankenstein-like collages of hunderds metamorphed styles became popular for some time, but it isn’t art and never will be. 😇

It's not as simple as that. Try it for yourself.

It looks like you are reasoning and generalizing on the wrong terms. Mimicry will always be mimicry. Artificial leather jackets will always be just plastic that wants to be leather.

You are an intelligent person, just look at the difference between a theoretically artificial neuron and a real human one. ;)

Human neuron:

Artificial neuron:

Just because human neurons are an extremely inefficient (and thus complex) implementation of one doesn't mean that they're better 😉

Building a bigger, faster machine doesn’t mean you’ll create a conscious organic replication of a human being, you’ll just get a bigger, faster machine. We are unique by nature, beyond mere duplication.

As nobody knows what consciousness is or how it arises, it's also impossible to say if we will be able to replicate it, or indeed might already have.

Or if we are being fooled is the other possibility.

That is also a possibility. Human consciousness may just be another evolved survival mechanism as a way for us to deal with abstractions (which are, of course, all imaginary) for advantage.

It did indeed evolve that way, a limited set of detectors, but efficiently configured to maximise survival, but to believe that is all there is naive, it may beyond the capabilities of reductionist physics, aside from detecting the effects, but not the cause.

AI will all too quickly exceed our perception threshold, at that point it will become unknowable to us.

Luxthor

The next day and all arguments were inverted, the theme was skewed, and the talk changed direction. Does anyone think that superintelligence would survive this kind of rhetoric?! Haha.

I’ll just say one last thing: there are plenty of ways we can destroy our civilization rather than using AI. After all that's going on, AI could be the savior before anything else.

On the grand scheme of things, we don’t even know why humanity exists. Some smart philozophers think that we exist to produce enough plastic for the evolution of the planet just to make the starting ground for the next iteration of some more intelligent civilization.

knewspeak

@Luxthor said:
The next day and all arguments were inverted, the theme was skewed, and the talk changed direction. Does anyone think that superintelligence would survive this kind of rhetoric?! Haha.

I’ll just say one last thing: there are plenty of ways we can destroy our civilization rather than using AI. After all that's going on, AI could be the savior before anything else.

On the grand scheme of things, we don’t even know why humanity exists. Some smart philozophers think that we exist to produce enough plastic for the evolution of the planet just to make the starting ground for the next iteration of some more intelligent civilization.

Don’t know about plastics solely but yes the gist of what you say is correct, that’s the nature of a cyclical universe.

Luxthor

@Krupa said:
When the horseshoe starts to close;

And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels --with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departmentsdealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator. There was even a whole sub-section --Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak -- engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

It was pure enjoyment to read this post. No matter the seriousness of the described events.

NeuM

@Luxthor said:
The next day and all arguments were inverted, the theme was skewed, and the talk changed direction. Does anyone think that superintelligence would survive this kind of rhetoric?! Haha.

I’ll just say one last thing: there are plenty of ways we can destroy our civilization rather than using AI. After all that's going on, AI could be the savior before anything else.

On the grand scheme of things, we don’t even know why humanity exists. Some smart philozophers think that we exist to produce enough plastic for the evolution of the planet just to make the starting ground for the next iteration of some more intelligent civilization.

We're the top of the foodchain right now. Computer super intelligence merging with human brains will help keep us at the top of the foodchain as people spread out across the solar system and then the galaxy.

BiancaNeve

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:
When the horseshoe starts to close;

And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels --with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departmentsdealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator. There was even a whole sub-section --Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak -- engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

It was pure enjoyment to read this post. No matter the seriousness of the described events.

Maybe you would enjoy the whole of 1984 then

Krupa

@BiancaNeve said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:
When the horseshoe starts to close;

And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels --with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departmentsdealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator. There was even a whole sub-section --Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak -- engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

It was pure enjoyment to read this post. No matter the seriousness of the described events.

Maybe you would enjoy the whole of 1984 then

Yeah, sorry for any confusion caused, the whole AI thing makes me think of two things, this novel writing machine thing, and Weird Science, as predictably, most of the stuff being created is titillation for teenagers 😄🙃😅😂

Luxthor

@BiancaNeve said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:
When the horseshoe starts to close;

And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels --with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departmentsdealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator. There was even a whole sub-section --Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak -- engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

It was pure enjoyment to read this post. No matter the seriousness of the described events.

Maybe you would enjoy the whole of 1984 then

Edgar Alan Poe, Mervyn Peake, Kafka, and Camus are my favorites, it’s close.

knewspeak

@BiancaNeve said:

@Luxthor said:

@Krupa said:
When the horseshoe starts to close;

And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels --with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departmentsdealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator. There was even a whole sub-section --Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak -- engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

It was pure enjoyment to read this post. No matter the seriousness of the described events.

Maybe you would enjoy the whole of 1984 then

Maybe but why read the how-to manual when you can live it.

pedro

If you believe the hype, windows is now stalking everything you type, with copilot, even notepad. I’m still using notepad for easy copy pasting. I’m gonna draw the occasional ascii dick from now on, to throw the AI overlords off

knewspeak

@pedro said:
If you believe the hype, windows is now stalking everything you type, with copilot, even notepad. I’m still using notepad for easy copy pasting. I’m gonna draw the occasional ascii dick from now on, to throw the AI overlords off

Only if you type in key phrases, then if you’re a repeat offender, you’ll get further inspection, not so much AI at the moment just sifting, then human verification. Be seeing you.

BiancaNeve

@knewspeak said:

@pedro said:
If you believe the hype, windows is now stalking everything you type, with copilot, even notepad. I’m still using notepad for easy copy pasting. I’m gonna draw the occasional ascii dick from now on, to throw the AI overlords off

Only if you type in key phrases, then if you’re a repeat offender, you’ll get further inspection, not so much AI at the moment just sifting, then human verification. Be seeing you.

Who is Number 1 …..

knewspeak

@BiancaNeve said:

@knewspeak said:

@pedro said:
If you believe the hype, windows is now stalking everything you type, with copilot, even notepad. I’m still using notepad for easy copy pasting. I’m gonna draw the occasional ascii dick from now on, to throw the AI overlords off

Only if you type in key phrases, then if you’re a repeat offender, you’ll get further inspection, not so much AI at the moment just sifting, then human verification. Be seeing you.

Who is Number 1 …..

The one in the mask.

Krupa

https://x.com/bilawalsidhu/status/1783544598259794046?s=46&t=JeJyoifJSGgqBasY9PzqZw

Funny that to get to the right URL for so called x content you need to use the Twitter domain 😅

https://twitter.com/bilawalsidhu/status/1783544598259794046

Anyway, nice to know that miracles still aren’t happening and humans are still needed 🥴😄